Keir Starmer went to private school

[Asking4afrend]

AIBU to be shocked that Keir Starmer went to private school? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. So he enjoyed an excellent education which increased his social mobility and then wants to bring down the system that helped him, even when they gave him a 100% bursary so that his parents didn’t have to pay the fees?

This is from wiki:

Starmer passed the 11-plus examination and gained entry to Reigate Grammar School, which at the time was a voluntary-aidedselective grammar school.[1][12] The school converted into an independent fee-paying school in 1976, while he was a student. The terms of the conversion were such that his parents were not required to pay for his schooling until he turned 16, and when he reached that point, the school, by now a charity, awarded him a bursary that allowed him to complete his education there without any parental contribution.

I only found out about this today when I was googling the school for another reason and looked up the alumni. What a hypocrite. You didn’t hear about this in the election during all his “my father was a toolmaker” speeches.

@RhaenysRocks I'm not saying you don't exist just that you are not the typical
private school parent.,,

More kids than the Government expected (by 4x) already left private education since January.

How do you separate whether it was VAT alone as opposed to the increase in fees in general, mortgage increases, cost of living etc.

The autumn budget is going to be a shitshow. Does anyone really think there is money to pay for ex private school kids now going state instead as well as WFA etc - where is it all going to come from?

@treetopsgreen - you do not need to separate. It is a cost to the taxpayer regardless and there are job losses coming out of the private education sector too (added cost).
People are now too scared to send their DCs to private school as well because it is a deterrent so even those who could theoretically afford it, are thinking twice. Because what if the school goes bust? You live in a nice leafy area perfectly decent local school, those are the ones jumping ship as the risk of going private with a Government against you for the foreseeable future is perhaps not worth taking, nor is it value for money if everyone is stressed in the private sector and reducing offering anyway. People are not stupid.
Nor will the Government be able to cover up the figures as the ISC will track them and report. If anything they won’t want to cause panic either and will still want to encourage people to go private. So we are probably only seeing half of the picture currently and it will likely get a lot worse.

Where is the exodus?

I don't think you can. But I do think it's blinkered to put a tax specifically designed to raise money (I thought tax had to do that) on a sector at a weak point in the economic cycle and still expect it to raise money.

All the things that impact any business affect schools. Their loans interest rates went up, their heating bills went up, thier staff costs went up. The people using the service have bigger costs too.

I live in an area with a lot of independent schools. There are job losses (also in state schools for balance). This isn't a good thing. We need people in jobs spending money locally.

Rolls have been falling in state schools, which has been quite problematic as it costs as much to employ a teacher for 25 pupils as 30 but the school receives funding according to the number of children on the roll. So yes, there is money to pay for more children going into the state school system.

We decided against private school although we may have to revisit again at a later date or for a different dc. For us it wasn't the VAT just the overall cost, the schools we looked at are 26k plus a yr before VAT. Personally it was too much cost for not enough benefit.

Rolls are falling because of birth rates, it's quite dramatic in some parts of London.

People are now too scared to send their DCs to private school as well because it is a deterrent so even those who could theoretically afford it, are thinking twice. Because what if the school goes bust? You live in a nice leafy area perfectly decent local school, those are the ones jumping ship as the risk of going private with a Government against you for the foreseeable future is perhaps not worth taking, nor is it value for money if everyone is stressed in the private sector and reducing offering anyway. People are not stupid.

I work in education, even before VAT schools went bust; look at how many have left the TPS or tried to & seen strike action. Falling rolls are impacting both state & private.

That only helps of they are going in at the right point in the right places. Reception rolls have dropped off a cliff in my area so there are zero issues with accomodating any people. But sixth form is a buldge year. The only sixth college has decided to no longer run the access courses to allow more bums on seats for A levels and it's dropped some vocational courses. Then people will complain about neets even though the life line second chance has been removed from the town..

Rolls do not fall mid year due to birth rates - which is what we are seeing in private schools.

But there is also a persistent false argument that because rolls are falling children moving from private to state won’t cost money. If there are more children than there would have been then it costs more regardless of starting point! If a school roll falls then they have fewer classes, fewer teachers and lower resource use.

So you honestly think that an adult shouldn't be allowed to have their own political opinions because of choices made by their parents?

I sent my daughter to a comprehensive. Does that mean she's not allowed to be in favour of selective education as an adult?

No, rolls in state schools have been falling over time and will continue to do so as current primary school reduced numbers feed through to secondaries.

If the state has been paying for full rolls in secondaries and continues to do so because the likely drop is compensated by children from private schools, then it won't be costing the state any more than it is now. OK, it may cost the state more than it would have done if numbers had dropped, but that is offset by the cost to schools which still have to put teachers in front of classes whether they have 30 or 25 children in them.

Rolls in state schools do not fall MID YEAR due to fluctuations in birth rates.

The number of teachers in a school do not remain constant regardless of pupil numbers. If there are fewer pupils they have fewer classes, including composite classes. Resource use also decreases. You suggest a scenario of 25 instead of 30, but it could equally be 30 instead of 35 with 35 requiring not just another teacher but another classroom to be built too.

Lots of kids started at schools which ended up as different iterations. In the seventies my husband passed the 11 plus and went to his town’s grammar. Before he even had a chance to start it turned comprehensive and he went regardless.

same as with KS. Only on a different trajectory!

I remember our previous discussions very well - you shunned the local comprehensive schools in your town and sent your daughter to a single-sex girls' school over 10 miles away. You did choose a form of selective education for your child.

When they talk about birth rate falling in London, what this actually means is that cost of living in London especially housing became so expensive and rent to what you get for your money/house price to number of bedrooms/size of garden became so ridiculous even more people than usual with kids moved out of London to leafy Surrey/Kent and further afield. So yes nationally less people are having kids, but the exodus out of London is cost driven. It is a shame as so much went into making London schools good and many children all over the country would benefit from these good schools, some of which will now be closing.
But the reason there were so many primary places in London is because there was a baby boom and those of us who have kids born in 2008, for example, who were turned away from hospital because so many kids were being born know full well that there are not going to be enough Sixth Form places this September. Whatever gaslighting Labour are doing, we know the situation.

She said that the money would be put into universal breakffast clubs which have begun to be rolled out.

@Araminta1003 can you link to some evidence that the falling birth rates in London are only because young families have moved out?
More young persons are not having dc at all & families are having fewer dc.

So bloody what! Is this your concern in life!?

Are school is not doing the breakfast club as they cannot make the shoddy amounts work financially. And the kids who need breakfast club are already paying for it and both breakfast and after school care makes a bit of extra money which often has to be used on TAs in the more difficult classes where there are lots of kids with SEND which are backlogged by the Council and not financially supported, and the teachers and head are just doing their very level best to provide as much as they possibly can for as many kids as they possibly can. Robbing Peter to pay Paul springs to mind. It is pretty much all over. And meanwhile many many state schools are doing their level best to tap richer parents to contribute something for dilapidated playgrounds, science labs, what have you, outdated tech. That is the reality on the ground. The state schools with richer parents groups who donate time and money do better. Not just because they can tap into donations, also because the parent group tends to be supportive, tends to fight for the EHCP, get a private assessment, all of it is not stacking up. Parents full well know that if you go to a richer state school with a better catchment, it is going to be an easier ride. And hence you pay up for more rent or the extra stamp duty, or get them into a grammar school - but all of this is allowed. This is what you get if you underfund a Covid traumatised generation and put unreasonable expectations on teachers and parents to just muddle through and your system does not fully support kids from deprived backgrounds.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Keir Starmer and Bridget Phillipson don't also send their daughters to single sex girls' schools, with Bridget Phillipson further utilising her Catholic faith for a better school.

Breakfast clubs were meant to be funded by 'closing non-dom loopholes'.

But they are actually funded by the tax payer 😂